Questions for Droopy re: "Anti-Mormons" v. Non-Mormons

[_harmony]

Stay on topic. Split and moved posts are in the Telestial Forum.

[_Some Schmo]

Is Mormonism a cult?

No. Only stupid people think this.

Really? I think this is a bit too strong. (For example, whatever else you think of Steve Benson, he is not exactly stupid or uninformed about Mormonism).

I personally don't find it useful to call Mormonism a cult. It offends people I care about and it just doesn't move the discussion along in most cases.

But it isn't exactly "stupid".

Yeah, I have to say this is the dumbest thing I've ever seen MsJack write.

Maybe she said it in an attempt to build bridges (after all, she's talking to Droopy, so maybe she lowered herself to his level?), but it's a weak attempt. Writing outrageous crap is not the best way to make relationships better unless you want a better relationship with someone outrageous (so... maybe it'll work on Droopy).

[_MsJack]

Tarski ~ Okay, I have time now.

I wrote the IAQ for my site a few years ago, when I was a bit more curmudgeonly than I am now. My experience with people calling Mormonism a "cult" had largely consisted of CARM-type evangelicals pounding their fists on the matter---and yes, I do think those types are not particularly bright. My answer was also meant to be somewhat facetious: "No, that's dumb, no, that's dumb, okay, here's a more serious explanation for both questions." So yes, it was harsh, but intentionally, hyperbolically so. It's also been up for years now, and this is the first time anyone who wasn't a Walter Martin devotee has complained about it.

Since then I've heard more erudite versions of the argument, making careful use of examples from LDS leaders, and those I have more respect for, even if I still think the word is completely beyond redemption. I even recall feeling pretty exasperated when the LDS church put out that appalling "Use Proper Sources" news release last year. I think my Facebook status that morning said something like, "Do you guys like it when people say you're a cult? I don't think you are, and I try to defend you on that point, but stuff like this doesn't help. [link]"

I've also heard more erudite arguments for labeling certain figures "anti-Mormons," though I've yet to hear a good argument for labeling me an anti-Mormon. I still think both positions are entirely wrong.

It probably would be a good idea for me to revise the IAQ and show more understanding for the complexities of the issue. I'll try to get around to doing that.

For example, whatever else you think of Steve Benson, he is not exactly stupid or uninformed about Mormonism

I don't know about Scientology, but Recovery from Mormonism sure seems like a Steve Benson cult to me.

[_Darth J]

Stay on topic. Split and moved posts are in the Telestial Forum.

Harmony, this is one of your more MADB-esque moves. Pointing out Droopy's invariable compulsion to go off on incoherent rants instead of responding to substantive issues that he would rather not directly address, and then watching that prediction play itself out, is directly pertinent to the OP. Droopy's proclivity to launch into ad hominem babble instead of making an argument and supporting it is what inspired MsJack's OP.

By definition, ad hominem attacks are irrelevant. In Droopy's incessant posting style, his ad hominem attacks are not only irrelevant, but stupid. I am not saying "stupid" simply as invective, but to call things what they are.

stupid:

1.
lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull.
2.
characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless: a stupid question.
3.
tediously dull, especially due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless: a stupid party.
4.
annoying or irritating; troublesome: Turn off that stupid radio.

A poster demonstrating the very behavior that is imputed to him in a call-out thread is not "off topic." It IS the topic. As MsJack correctly points out, Droopy spent considerable time saying various things in response to the OP and my comments on it, and yet nothing in those "responses" was actually responsive.

A policy is a rule that is consistently applied, not an ad hoc whim reminiscent of an MADB moderator. Since you have decided on this heretofore unknown policy of splitting a thread because a person doing exactly what a call-out thread says he or she does is "off topic," I look forward to you splitting off every single thread in which Droopy has posted or in which he posts in the future, since his behavior has never varied and shows no signs of doing so in the future.

[_Pollypinks]

Anti Mormon? Cult? Many are anti muslim, anti christian, anti jew. There's plenty of room at the table for many beliefs, but I understand the cult viewpoint the best. When you are raised to believe you will be god someday, something is amiss, since it doesn't appear to have started out that way eons ago. Or, to think you will have extra blessings if you are impregnated more than your neighbor. Or, to have to know certain signs and symbols to get into heaven. Yes, we are talking about a cult here, but I don't say that in public. Evangelicals get whipped into action just mentioning the word. And let me say for the record, that you can get dumped by any church and suffer just as much as you do when the elders decide to dump you. I suffered far worse PTSD when kicked out of a baptist church than I did when I left Mormonism.

[_Darth J]

Bump, to remind our favorite Mormofascist about the OP.

[_harmony]

Stay on topic. Split and moved posts are in the Telestial Forum.

Harmony, this is one of your more MADB-esque moves. Pointing out Droopy's invariable compulsion to go off on incoherent rants instead of responding to substantive issues that he would rather not directly address, and then watching that prediction play itself out, is directly pertinent to the OP. Droopy's proclivity to launch into ad hominem babble instead of making an argument and supporting it is what inspired MsJack's OP.

By definition, ad hominem attacks are irrelevant. In Droopy's incessant posting style, his ad hominem attacks are not only irrelevant, but stupid. I am not saying "stupid" simply as invective, but to call things what they are.

stupid:

1.
lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull.
2.
characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless: a stupid question.
3.
tediously dull, especially due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless: a stupid party.
4.
annoying or irritating; troublesome: Turn off that stupid radio.

A poster demonstrating the very behavior that is imputed to him in a call-out thread is not "off topic." It IS the topic. As MsJack correctly points out, Droopy spent considerable time saying various things in response to the OP and my comments on it, and yet nothing in those "responses" was actually responsive.

A policy is a rule that is consistently applied, not an ad hoc whim reminiscent of an MADB moderator. Since you have decided on this heretofore unknown policy of splitting a thread because a person doing exactly what a call-out thread says he or she does is "off topic," I look forward to you splitting off every single thread in which Droopy has posted or in which he posts in the future, since his behavior has never varied and shows no signs of doing so in the future.

Anytime you want to volunteer as a mod, I'll be there for ya, Tarski.

You can find Telestial quality posts in the Telestial forum. And that's what those were. (had I deleted the posts, closed the thread, or in any way interfered with the pertinent discussion, you'd have a point. I didn't.).

[Guest]

-

[Guest]

-

[_Tarski]

Anytime you want to volunteer as a mod, I'll be there for ya, Tarski.

Wait! What?
Did you mean DarthJ or me? Who were you talking to?